Quick thought on college professors

[Shogun]

Was just watching President Obama's Speech about college costs, and I never really thought about but...

Professors tend be amongst the most liberal minded demographics in the country. Is it just me, or is it the pinnacle of hypocrisy that they work for one of the most aggressively capitalist institutions in the country?

Are they just completely full of shyt, or am I missing something?

edit: You can rate threads now? I'ma give myself a 5

edit 2: I cant rate my own thread Thats actually a good thing

 

[No1]

Was just watching President Obama's Speech about college costs, and I never really thought about but...

Professors tend be amongst the most liberal minded demographics in the country. Is it just me, or is it the pinnacle of hypocrisy that they work for one of the most aggressively capitalist institutions in the country?

Are they just completely full of shyt, or am I missing something?

edit: You can rate threads now? I'ma give myself a 5 :smugdraper

Professors have to eatt too and I have had plenty of professors that refuse to charge us for books so they just photocopy everything. That, and their salaries are often available for every student to see. They work for universities because that is the only way to fund their research. But there were professors before the costs skyrocketed and the problem we have now didn't exist then by and large. I don't think it's a conflict of interest unless that professor is also part of the administration or has clout like that. Most professors I know empathize because they have children going through the same thing or they're still paying their own loans off.

 

[Trip]

College administrators are bigger hypocrites...

 

[Shogun]

I hear what y'all are saying, but I still don't think that completely exonerates these professors. They eatin pretty good themselves. Plus I doubt you'd make the same argument for the drone pilot killing Afghans, and then saying "politicians put us here, but I don't agree with it so it's not on me"

 

[Serious]

I hear what y'all are saying, but I still don't think that completely exonerates these professors. They eatin pretty good themselves. Plus I doubt you'd make the same argument for the drone pilot killing Afghans, and then saying "politicians put us here, but I don't agree with it so it's not on me"

a lot of professors are part time and work at more than one college, university.

Some are good, but many feel they're underpaid....

Imo the best professors I had were the part time ones. The tenured professors tended to be a little more stuck up in their ways...

Tenured professors do make between 90-150k+

 

[No1]

I hear what y'all are saying, but I still don't think that completely exonerates these professors. They eatin pretty good themselves. Plus I doubt you'd make the same argument for the drone pilot killing Afghans, and then saying "politicians put us here, but I don't agree with it so it's not on me"

A professor is still educating you and participating in a public good, it's on a much different playing field than taking away a life...

 

[Shogun]

A professor is still educating you and participating in a public good, it's on a much different playing field than taking away a life...

protecting freedom

Its an extreme example, but any other countless examples could be used to prove the same point.

 

[Serious]

I hear what y'all are saying, but I still don't think that completely exonerates these professors. They eatin pretty good themselves. Plus I doubt you'd make the same argument for pastors taking advantage of their congregation and getting super rich, and then saying "Gawd put us here, but it's what gawd would have wanted "

fixed

 

[Shogun]

fixed

a much better example

 

[No1]

protecting freedom

Its an extreme example, but any other countless examples could be used to prove the same point.

Without writing an essay, I think the difference is necessity. Competent professors and teachers are necessary components of a civil society (modern). While you can find countless examples that demonstrate your point that "participating in a system should hold you somewhat culpable regardless of your role", very few will be analogous in necessity and inflexibility. With that said, you never posted, what Obama suggested today.

Obama introduces new performance funding system for colleges
The plan will direct taxpayer funds to the schools that are most effective at graduating students affordably
BY ANYA KAMENETZ

• 0
  
• 0
  
• 0
  
• more
  

TOPICS: FAST COMPANY, PRESIDENT OBAMA, UNIVERSITY OF BUFFALO, EDUCATION, COLLEGE, RATING SYSTEM,STUDENT DEBT, BUSINESS NEWS, LIFE NEWS, POLITICS NEWS

FILE - In a Dec. 31, 2012, file photo President Barack Obama pauses as he speaks in the South Court Auditorium at the White House in Washington. (Credit: AP Photo/Charles Dharapak, file)
In a speech at the University of Buffalo this morning, President Obama is outlining a new, data–driven plan to tackle rising college costs. It’s simple, but somehow revolutionary: The plan directs taxpayer money to the colleges that are most effective at graduating students affordably.

When you look at the simple equation of money + students = degrees + debt, there are three broad groups of colleges:

1) Expensive, highly selective schools: Ivies, Berkeley, flagship state schools, small liberal arts schools admit around 10% of all college students, charge them a lot of money, and do a great job graduating them, sometimes with a lot of debt (NYU) and other times, if they have large endowments and good financial aid policies, with little debt (Princeton). These colleges, however, do a terrible job recruiting poorer, yet highly qualified students.

2) Less selective publics and community colleges These institutions admit most of the students, charge them a fast–increasing amount of money, (up 250% over three decades) and do a so–so job of graduating them, with large amounts of debt.

3) For–profit, online colleges These schools admit 10–13% of the students, charge them higher prices than publics, and have awful graduation rates. More than half of the students leave without a degree, and for–profits account for nearly half of all student loan defaults.

Today, President Obama proposes to develop a performance rating system for all colleges that takes each of these factors into account. Once the rating system is established, he wants to actually put some teeth into it, by driving federal student aid dollars to the colleges that do the best job graduating students at an affordable price, while disqualifying the dropout factories. What a concept!

 

[Type Username Here]

You can't just dump all professors into one pile. There are many different titles, salaries and responsibilities. Most of my professors are here for the research. They get funding to do what they love. Only downside of this is that they kind of put teaching on the back burner in some cases and the undergrads suffer.

A lot of them are basically temp workers, especially at the lower level.

But I will agree with you on one thing, they tend to lean heavily to the liberal side of the spectrum. That being said, in some cases it does present an obvious conflict of ideals.

 

[No1]

fixed

a much better example

No, it isn't. It actually proves my point. Pastors do not have to command the salaries, live the lifestyles or behave in the manner that they do. They choose to of their own volition. It is very nearly the antithesis of what they should be doing. They more control than any generic professor does, and further, the church is not an institution with exorbitant costs that must be born by churchgoers. These are all personal decisions that pastors make. Pastors are literally the head of the church. Professors are not even Deacon status. Once again, you have not provided an analog.

 

[Shogun]

Without writing an essay, I think the difference is necessity. Competent professors and teachers are necessary components of a civil society (modern). While you can find countless examples that demonstrate your point that "participating in a system should hold you somewhat culpable regardless of your role", very few will be analogous in necessity and inflexibility. With that said, you never posted, what Obama suggested today.

Obama introduces new performance funding system for colleges
The plan will direct taxpayer funds to the schools that are most effective at graduating students affordably
BY ANYA KAMENETZ

• 0
  
• 0
  
• 0
  
• more
  

TOPICS: FAST COMPANY, PRESIDENT OBAMA, UNIVERSITY OF BUFFALO, EDUCATION, COLLEGE, RATING SYSTEM,STUDENT DEBT, BUSINESS NEWS, LIFE NEWS, POLITICS NEWS

FILE - In a Dec. 31, 2012, file photo President Barack Obama pauses as he speaks in the South Court Auditorium at the White House in Washington. (Credit: AP Photo/Charles Dharapak, file)
In a speech at the University of Buffalo this morning, President Obama is outlining a new, data–driven plan to tackle rising college costs. It’s simple, but somehow revolutionary: The plan directs taxpayer money to the colleges that are most effective at graduating students affordably.

When you look at the simple equation of money + students = degrees + debt, there are three broad groups of colleges:

1) Expensive, highly selective schools: Ivies, Berkeley, flagship state schools, small liberal arts schools admit around 10% of all college students, charge them a lot of money, and do a great job graduating them, sometimes with a lot of debt (NYU) and other times, if they have large endowments and good financial aid policies, with little debt (Princeton). These colleges, however, do a terrible job recruiting poorer, yet highly qualified students.

2) Less selective publics and community colleges These institutions admit most of the students, charge them a fast–increasing amount of money, (up 250% over three decades) and do a so–so job of graduating them, with large amounts of debt.

3) For–profit, online colleges These schools admit 10–13% of the students, charge them higher prices than publics, and have awful graduation rates. More than half of the students leave without a degree, and for–profits account for nearly half of all student loan defaults.

Today, President Obama proposes to develop a performance rating system for all colleges that takes each of these factors into account. Once the rating system is established, he wants to actually put some teeth into it, by driving federal student aid dollars to the colleges that do the best job graduating students at an affordable price, while disqualifying the dropout factories. What a concept!

His proposals is actually what motivated this thread. I was wondering how professors would feel about them, considering their traditional liberal leanings. I didn't include the proposals in the thread in at attempt to avoid the typical partisan banter that goes on in the vast majority of threads around here.

 

[Serious]

You can't just dump all professors into one pile. There are many different titles, salaries and responsibilities. Most of my professors are here for the research. They get funding to do what they love. Only downside of this is that they kind of put teaching on the back burner in some cases and the undergrads suffer.

A lot of them are basically temp workers, especially at the lower level.
.
But I will agree with you on one thing, they tend to lean heavily to the liberal side of the spectrum. That being said, in some cases it does present an obvious conflict of ideals.

I remember for Chem 101, my professor was a Physics Graduate, who loved talking about his research on quantum mechanic, but quite frankly sucked, in regards to teaching. Many students suffered...

 

[Depreciating Asset]

fixed

I wish I could dap this twice.